Probably not. Apple doesn't want customers who buy based primarily on specifications. The Mac experience is not about the horsepower under the hood, it's about OS X. You could have the fastest Windows machine available right now, and compare it to Apple's simplest machine, the Mac Mini, and I'd still rather use the Mac Mini, simply because it runs OS X. Yes, it'd be nice if the Mini was a little more up to date as compared to the rest of Apple's lineup, but if the specs are the only thing holding you back, you're not really ready for a Mac yet._________________MacBook Pro 1.83GHz Core Duo, 2GB RAM, 250GB HD, Dell 802.11n card, 1.4TB external
MacBook 1.83GHz Core Duo, 2GB RAM, 60GB HD
iMac 1.83GHz Core Duo, 2GB RAM, 160GB HD, 1TB external, EyeTV Hybrid

You're absolutely right, DoLu. Mac OS X is the best operating system available at the moment - installing and maintaining Linux feels like you're building self-assembly furniture and Windows is just a pile of dogsh*t. I understand your frustration with the infrequency of hardware updates, but remember that OS X's stability is partly related to the Mac's predictably limited choice of CPU, motherboard and video card.

All the same, if Apple's products are so good then why haven't they put a bullet in Microsoft's head? Well, I think it has a lot to do with the Apple attitude that you characterise in your post. Instead of remembering their Apple II roots and building a US$350 OS X machine to put in the hands of everyone, they insist on building over-priced status symbols for the benefit of 'rich yuppies' and brainwashed devotees of the Church Of Cupertino.

If you hate Windows enough to swallow hard and pay Apple's prices, then follow my example; buy the cheapest Mac in the range and nothing more. At least you'll be running OS X, and you can then buy upgrades and peripherals from companies that don't treat you like you're an unwelcome guest in an elitist little club.

Last edited by JohnnyBoy on Sun Aug 05, 2007 5:02 pm; edited 1 time in total

I like the fact the whenever mac bring out a new operating system, there's one version and its only $129 to upgrade. Unlike windows, where there is several versions and it costs a bomb to get the version with all the features._________________
Too much spec to add here ....

Probably not. Apple doesn't want customers who buy based primarily on specifications. The Mac experience is not about the horsepower under the hood, it's about OS X. You could have the fastest Windows machine available right now, and compare it to Apple's simplest machine, the Mac Mini, and I'd still rather use the Mac Mini, simply because it runs OS X. Yes, it'd be nice if the Mini was a little more up to date as compared to the rest of Apple's lineup, but if the specs are the only thing holding you back, you're not really ready for a Mac yet.

OS X is probably the main reason why people are coming over from the Windows and Linux world. It's the main reason why I want to come over. But I also want some value in the hardware. You would have to agree that Apple is really lagging behind Dell, Sony and HP in this department. The MacBook Pro is really the only system that is up-to-date from a hardware standpoint. The MacBook hasn't been moved up to Santa Rosa yet, and the iMac and Mac mini haven't been touched in nearly a year. I guess Apple feels like they can coast on being popular at the moment. I just want Apple to continue with a headless system for under like $1300 dollars. I have no interest in buying an all-in-one system from them or any other computer maker. I never have and never will. Plus, I already have a beautiful 24" Samsung LCD and all the extras one would need. So yes, I'm more than ready for a Mac. Now is Apple ready to offer me an updated headless Mac or not?

JohnnyBoy wrote:

All the same, if Apple's products are so good then why haven't they put a bullet in Microsoft's head? Well, I think it has a lot to do with the Apple attitude that you characterise in your post. Instead of remembering their Apple II roots and building a US$350 OS X machine to put in the hands of everyone, they insist on building over-priced status symbols for the benefit of 'rich yuppies' and brainwashed devotees of the Church Of Cupertino.

Well said! I don't think the devotees get it. And hey, rich people could care less. They see Apple as a status symbol brand. I would rather see Apple as a true brand for the masses, and that is why I criticize.

D444niel wrote:

I like the fact the whenever mac bring out a new operating system, there's one version and its only $129 to upgrade. Unlike windows, where there is several versions and it costs a bomb to get the version with all the features.

I agree. It was stupid for Microsoft to have so many versions of Vista. But $112 still gets you out the door with a nice version of Vista.

Did you really mean to say "nice version of Vista"? That's a bit like saying "nice version of vomit".

I have to admit I'd prefer Apple to have an inexpensive headless Intel Mac like the Mac Mini. I'll just see what's available when it comes time for me to buy a Mac._________________Web Development at http://www.petermount.com

Did you really mean to say "nice version of Vista"? That's a bit like saying "nice version of vomit".

I mostly meant a version with an acceptable feature set. I really have nothing against Vista though. I like some of the new features and WMC quite a bit. That being said, I use Ubuntu for most of my daily computing. I would like to swap it out with OS X but.......

Did you really mean to say "nice version of Vista"? That's a bit like saying "nice version of vomit".

I mostly meant a version with an acceptable feature set. I really have nothing against Vista though. I like some of the new features and WMC quite a bit. That being said, I use Ubuntu for most of my daily computing. I would like to swap it out with OS X but.......

Aaah. Fellow (K)Ubuntu user.

I use Kubuntu Feisty for my daily computing. I'm just crying out for a Unix based desktop OS that works with everything.

My dream is to have an Intel Mac and have Ubuntu and Windows running on it as well as the Mac OS._________________Web Development at http://www.petermount.com

My dream is to have an Intel Mac and have Ubuntu and Windows running on it as well as the Mac OS.

It's mine too! I'm going to be all over Parallels or Fusion if Apple cooperates. How long have you been using Kubuntu?

I started using Kubuntu after Quanta+ in Fedora Core 5 kept crashing on me in Easter of 2006. I've mainly used Kubuntu but I had a brief try with Ubuntu after I had some bugs in Kubuntu. Feisty seems quite stable. I use Kate instead of Quanta+ now.

Seriously, I've made a firm decision to buy a Mac after after I've straightened out a few other things. I've got a business (as well as my full time job) so the old adage of "Time is Money" really is true for me. It might take me an extra couple of months for me to buy a Mac than it would a new Intel PC but it will be worth it._________________Web Development at http://www.petermount.com

OS X is probably the main reason why people are coming over from the Windows and Linux world. It's the main reason why I want to come over. But I also want some value in the hardware. You would have to agree that Apple is really lagging behind Dell, Sony and HP in this department. The MacBook Pro is really the only system that is up-to-date from a hardware standpoint. The MacBook hasn't been moved up to Santa Rosa yet, and the iMac and Mac mini haven't been touched in nearly a year. I guess Apple feels like they can coast on being popular at the moment. I just want Apple to continue with a headless system for under like $1300 dollars. I have no interest in buying an all-in-one system from them or any other computer maker. I never have and never will. Plus, I already have a beautiful 24" Samsung LCD and all the extras one would need. So yes, I'm more than ready for a Mac. Now is Apple ready to offer me an updated headless Mac or not?

Fair enough. Your points about Apple's hardware lagging a little right now are right on the money. Along with the MacBook Pro, I'd also say the Mac Pro is up to date, the rest are a few months behind, particularly with Santa Rosa based stuff all over the Windows world lately._________________MacBook Pro 1.83GHz Core Duo, 2GB RAM, 250GB HD, Dell 802.11n card, 1.4TB external
MacBook 1.83GHz Core Duo, 2GB RAM, 60GB HD
iMac 1.83GHz Core Duo, 2GB RAM, 160GB HD, 1TB external, EyeTV Hybrid

Don't ask me why, but I had a feeling Apple would "lag" behind after they moved to Intel. But I will say that they've had a lot on their plate over the past two years and seem stretched. I also wonder about pricing pressure and supply from Intel and whether or not it has contributed to the pokiness. We have to remember that Apple isn't the biggest guy on the block when it comes to buying chips from Intel. Then again, I don't know if that would be a factor with certain level of purchases. Apple has moved up and passed some of the second tier PC makers in market share. Whatever the case, they need to do better job going forward.

I started using Kubuntu after Quanta+ in Fedora Core 5 kept crashing on me in Easter of 2006. I've mainly used Kubuntu but I had a brief try with Ubuntu after I had some bugs in Kubuntu. Feisty seems quite stable. I use Kate instead of Quanta+ now.

I've only been using Ubuntu for like a year now. There might be better distros out there, but it seems to work best for me. I also don't have much time to play around with work and all.

ClunkClunk wrote:

Along with the MacBook Pro, I'd also say the Mac Pro is up to date, the rest are a few months behind, particularly with Santa Rosa based stuff all over the Windows world lately.

I always seem to forget about the Mac Pro. I guess it's because the darn thing is way out of my budget for a new computer. But I will say that for a $2500 computer, it comes with a pretty crappy standard video card. The rest is cutting edge though. And those internal SATA drive bays are to die for.